FINAL EVALUATION. Angola. Programme Title: Governance of Water and Sanitation in Angola s poor Neighbourhoods

Transcrição

1 FINAL EVALUATION Angola Thematic window Democratic Economic Governance Programme Title: Governance of Water and Sanitation in Angola s poor Neighbourhoods Author: Carlos Carravilla, consultant March 2013

2 Prologue This final evaluation report has been coordinated by the MDG Achievement Fund joint programme in an effort to assess results at the completion point of the programme. As stipulated in the monitoring and evaluation strategy of the Fund, all 130 programmes, in 8 thematic windows, are required to commission and finance an independent final evaluation, in addition to the programme s mid-term evaluation. Each final evaluation has been commissioned by the UN Resident Coordinator s Office (RCO) in the respective programme country. The MDG-F Secretariat has provided guidance and quality assurance to the country team in the evaluation process, including through the review of the TORs and the evaluation reports. All final evaluations are expected to be conducted in line with the OECD Development Assistant Committee (DAC) Evaluation Network Quality Standards for Development Evaluation, and the United Nations Evaluation Group (UNEG) Standards for Evaluation in the UN System. Final evaluations are summative in nature and seek to measure to what extent the joint programme has fully implemented its activities, delivered outputs and attained outcomes. They also generate substantive evidence-based knowledge on each of the MDG-F thematic windows by identifying best practices and lessons learned to be carried forward to other development interventions and policy-making at local, national, and global levels. We thank the UN Resident Coordinator and their respective coordination office, as well as the joint programme team for their efforts in undertaking this final evaluation. MDG-F Secretariat The analysis and recommendations of this evaluation are those of the evaluator and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Joint Programme or MDG-F Secretariat.

3 Final evaluation of the Joint Programme: Governance of Water and Sanitation in Angola s poor Neighbourhoods (MDGF-1830) FINAL REPORT Prepared by: Carlos Carravilla 1

4 Executive summary 4 Introduction 8 Background 8 Goals and methodology of evaluation 9 Description of the joint programme and the work context 12 Findings by level of analysis and information needs 17 Design level 17 Relevance 17 Process level 27 Efficiency 27 Ownership in the process 36 Results level 40 Effectiveness 40 Sustainability 44 Conclusions 48 Good practices, success stories and lessons learned 55 Recommendations 56 Table 1. Reshaped Results Framework 15 Table 2. Budget modification after UNRCO closed operations in Angola 18 Table 3. Modification of the Outcome OVIs 19 Table 4. Contribution of the JP WatSan to the MDGs 21 Table 5. Beneficiaries count 40 Figure 1. Location of the programme 16 Figure 2. Charts and figures as of 31 December Figure 3. Charts and figures as of 31 December Annexes Annex 1. Evaluation matrix Annex 2. Interviews and FGDs guides Annex 3. Monitoring Framework assessment Annex 4. Quadro de Monitoria do Programa March 2013 Annex 5. UNDP MDG-F Media Development project Annex 6. Improvement Plan-Final Status Annex 7. FGD and interviewees listing Annex 8. Evaluator s CV Annex 9. Evaluation Terms of Reference 2

5 CBOs CM DNAAS DPEA EA EPAL GAS HACT IFAL ILO INEFOP IOM MDG-F MINAMB MINEA MINPLAN MOGECA MDTF NGO NSC PMC SISAS STLC UNDP USAID UTNSA UNDAF UNHRO UNICEF WASH Community Based Organizations Comissão de Moradores Direção Nacional de Abastecimento de Água e Saneamento Direção Provincial de Energia e Águas Executivo Angolano Empresa Pública de Águas de Luanda Grupo Água e Saneamento Harmonized Cash Transfers Instituto de Formação da Administração Local International Labour Organization Instituto Nacional de Emprego e Formação Profissional International Organization for Migration Millennium Development Goals Achievement Fund Ministério do Ambiente Ministério de Energia e Águas Ministério do Planeamento Modelo de Gestão Comunitária de Água Multi Donor Trust Fund Non Governmental Organizations National Steering Committee Programme Management Committee Sistema de Informação do Sector de Água e Saneamento Saneamento Total Liderado pela Comunidade United Nations Development Programme United States Agency for International Development National Technical Unit for Sanitation Coordination United Nations Development Assistance Framework United Nations Human Rights Office United Nations Fund for Children Water, Sanitation & Hygiene 3

6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. This is an individual and final evaluation of the joint programme entitled Governance of Water and Sanitation in Angola s poor Neighbourhoods (MDGF-1830) (JP WatSan). The programme seeks to: (1) establish a pro-poor policy and regulatory framework that feature community participation in the provision and management of water and sanitation (WatSan) facilities; (2) promote the autonomy of communities in the management of WatSan facilities through the creation and/or strengthening of (i) Grupos de Água e Saneamento (GAS) in rural areas of Moxico Province and (ii) Comissões de Moradores in peri-urban bairros 1 of Luanda; (3) reinforce the capacity of local governments to effectively monitor community WatSan management systems, mobilize resources and fund community WatSan projects; and (4) put in place an enhanced accountability system for peri-urban and rural water and sanitation sector. 2. Angola s water supply and sanitation sector has until recently remained the least developed in Africa due to four decades of persistent civil conflict. Significant water supply and sanitation sector transformations began with the passage of Lei das Águas in 2002, which, together with the formation of the 2003 Water Sector Development Strategy 2 and Water Sector Programme 3, define the policy framework for water resources management and sets the foundation for the national policy for the use of water as consumption good. 3. The programme was approved by the Secretariat of the Millennium Development Goals Achievement Fund (MDG-F) on 2 April 2008, but a few months later one of the partners, the United Nations Human Rights Office (UNHRO), had to close operations in the country. This substantially delayed the start of the programme, which was adapted to be implemented by the remaining agencies and their governmental partners: (1) United Nations Children s Fund (UNICEF), United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) as lead agency, International Labour Organization (ILO), International Organization for Migration (IOM); (2) Ministério do Ambiente da República de Angola (MINAMB), and the Ministério de Energia e Águas da República de Angola (MINEA) as lead government institution. The programme began in March 2009 with the effective delivery of funds. The end date is, after the Secretariat endorsed on 20 March 2012 a twelve months no-cost extension, 20 March Neighbourhoods. 2 Estratégia de Desenvolvimento do Sector das Águas. 3 Programa de Desenvolvimento do Sector das Águas 4

7 4. The evaluation seeks to: (1) measure to what extent the joint programme has fully implemented its activities, delivered outputs and attained outcomes and specifically measuring development results; (2) generate substantive evidence based knowledge on best practices and lessons learned that could be useful to other development interventions at national and international level. 5. The evaluation process was conducted following a qualitative design, which is the option that best fits the type of questions described in the Terms of Reference (ToR) for the assignment, and best adapts to some particularities of joint programmes: multiplicity of agencies, national partners and society groups involved. The evaluator promoted a learning process essentially participatory and inclusive, giving voice to different population groups and institutions involved in the programme. 6. The main information collection tools used were: individual interview, Focus Groups Discussions (FGD) and participative workshops with the main evaluation stakeholders. 7. Evaluation users: (1) National and local partners: Administrações Municipais de Cacuaco and Viana and Distrito Urbano de Kilamba Kiaxi 4 (Província de Luanda), Administrações Municipais de Luena, Luau and Kamanongue (Província de Moxico), Departamento da Abastecimento de Água e Saneamento (DNAAS)/ Ministério de Energia e Águas (MINEA), Instituto de Ciências Religiosas de Angola, Unidade Técnica Nacional de Saneamento Ambiental (UTNSA)/Ministério do Ambiente (MINAMB), Universidade Agostinho Neto; (2) Agencia Española de Cooperación Internacional para el Desarrollo (AECID); (3) Secretariat of the Millennium Development Goals Fund (MDG-F); (4) United Nations Country Team (UNCT) agencies involved in the programme: UNICEF, UNDP, ILO and IOM; (5) the persons and communities involved in the activities promoted by the programme; (6) International Non-Governmental Organizations (INGOs): Oxfam GB, Dom Bosco, Lutheran World Federation and Salvation Army; (7) Angolan Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs): Development Workshop; (8) private sector: Kazukama and Mambeto. 8. Some context issues that turned to adversely affect the development of the originally planned strategy were clearly identified in the design phase but no alternative solutions were assessed in that case of identified risks such as cost effectiveness, pace of reform, realignment of capacities and availability of national expertise. An in-depth feasibility assessment would have probably recommended the development 4 The Administração Municipal of Kilamba Kiaxi was taken up by the Administração Municipal of Luanda just before the national elections held on 31 August

8 of a more realistic intervention proposal. Finally, the intervention strategy was not gender sensitive; characteristic that would have required a gender needs assessment during the design phase. 9. The programme has been able to make some significant contributions to the development of the water and sanitation public policy framework that are in the process of institutionalization, namely: (1) three studies that will facilitate the effective implementation of the Lei de Águas (MINEA); (2) Plano Nacional de Saneamento Ambiental (MINAMB); (3) Plano Estratégico Nacional de Gestão de Resíduos Sólidos (PESGRU) (MINAMB), which was partially sponsored the programme. Additionally, the Modelo de Gestão Comunitária de Água (MOGECA), developed by the Angolan Non Governmental Organization (NGO) Development Workshop (DW) in partnership with UNICEF and the European Union, and widely applied by UNICEF during the JP WatSan implementation, has been officially endorsed by the MINEA. 10. Approximately 258,000 persons (100,844 women) were benefited with new or rehabilitated water systems (new water points: 50; water points rehabilitated; 72 water supply at schools were installed or rehabilitated; 41 Water supply at health centres were installed or rehabilitated; 8 small water systems were installed or rehabilitated). 11. Approximately 68,216 persons were trained in Community Led Total Sanitation (CLTS), which is an approach to sanitation considered as strategic by the EA and included in its Estratégia de Combate a Pobreza (Poverty Reduction Strategy). 12. Águas de Portugal, the consulting company that facilitated the participative elaboration of the Plano Diretor de Água e Saneamento of Kilamba Kiaxi Municipality compiled and submitted all the materials used to the Instituto de Formação de Administração Local (IFAL), which is the institution responsible for municipal capacity development in Angola. IFAL has already trained some other municipalities in the preparation of participative Planos Diretores Gerais Municipais, although needs some capacity building to replicate training specializing in the elaboration of Planos Diretores Municipais de Água e Saneamento. 13. The programme was designed jointly among the participating UNCT agencies with low involvement of national and sub-national partners. Implementation and monitoring have not been conducted in a joint way: agencies continued to do their business as usual in terms of the nature and modality of implementing the activities within context of the joint programme. Additionally, the value added of some UNCT agencies involved in the programme is questionable. 6

9 14. Ownership of the MDG-F joint programming model among UNCT agencies can be assessed as reduced: UNCT agencies managers interviewed during the final evaluation process consider the joint programming model proposed by the MDG-F as an artificial external imposition that, according to some opinions of technical staff members of the UNCT agencies involved, obstructed implementation. Recently, the UNCT created a permanent interagency coordination body involving UNCT agencies deputy managers (Programme Management Group) that is considered more interesting by the UNCT agencies than an ad hoc structure. 15. The programme has operated with reduced effectiveness: only 37% of the planned targets were finally totally achieved. The evaluation detected some situations that indicate problems of sustainability of two components: (1) small businesses sponsored by IOM that benefitted the GAS in Moxico Province. (2) Water systems installed/rehabilitated by UNICEF; although there are some exceptions, like the chafarizes 5 rehabilitated in bairro Pedreira (Cacuaco Municipality, Province of Luanda), where the excellent community organizational level (Comissão do Moradores) appears key to overcoming the multiple sustainability problems faced by these systems in Angola, chiefly: limited financial and human resources among provincial and municipal administrations, which are not really able to provide adequate maintenance to water systems and keep a stock of spare parts; extreme vulnerability of rural communities in Moxico Province; very weak organizational levels in rural areas in Moxico Province and also weak organizational structures in some bairros in peri-urban Luanda. 16. It has to be added that UNICEF highlights, as a lesson learned on water points in rural areas, that systems are sustainable only when there is and active and continuous support from the users that includes financial contribution for maintenance. However, organizing and motivating communities for this role is not an easy task. Therefore it is also a challenge and responsibility of the EA and Direções Provinciais de Energia e Água to facilitate this aspect through education of the rural population. UNICEF continues to work in this direction supporting provincial partners, but behavioural change takes time to show results beyond the time scope of the programme. 5 Water points. 7

10 17. Products and outputs potentially sustainable: Planos Diretores Municipal de Água e Saneamento 6 of Kilamba Kiaxi, Luau and Kamanongue. The studies that complement the Lei de Águas (MINEA). Plano Estratégico Nacional de Gestão de Resíduos Sólidos (MINAMB): already approved by the National Assembly. The DNAAS is preparing the corresponding implementation decrees to receive a budget for its implementation and considers that this Plano Estratégico will contribute to a complete restructuration of the sector. Plano Nacional de Saneamento Ambiental: the draft version has yet to be approved by the National Assembly. The DNAAS assesses this product as a strategic one for the EA. Modelo de Gestão Comunitária (MOGECA): officially endorsed by the MINEA. CLTS approach and Sanitation Marketing: already approved by the EA. CLTS training manual for community agents: already approved by the EA. Water Quality manual: approved by DNAAS. Contract Management training documentation: approved by DNAAS and part of the training of the DNAAS personnel. Communication material on Hygiene, Water Treatment, and Safe Storage (HWTSS), Hands Washing and CLTS: approved by the EA. It seems that SEFOJOR will continue funding trainings on MDGs. Water systems installed in bairro Pedreira in Cacuaco Municipality. 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1. Background 18. The Millennium Development Goals Achievement Fund (MDG-F) is an International Cooperation mechanism whose aim is to accelerate progress on the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) worldwide. Established in December 2006 with a contribution of 528 million from the Spanish Government to the United Nations system, the MDG-F supports national governments, local authorities and citizen organizations in their efforts to tackle poverty and inequality. In September 2008 at the UN High Level Event on MDGs, Spain committed an additional 90 million to the MDG-F. 6 Every municipality must have a Plano Diretor Municipal de Água e Saneamento by the end of 2013 according to the Lei de Águas. The EA will provide funds to implement these plans during

11 19. The MDG-F operates through the UN teams in each country, promoting increased coherence and effectiveness in development interventions in line with the Paris Declaration and the Accra Agenda for Action through collaboration among UN agencies. The Fund uses a joint Programme mode of intervention and has currently approved 130 joint Programmes in 50 countries. These reflect eight thematic windows that contribute in various ways towards progress on the MDGs. 20. This evaluation is part of a monitoring and evaluation strategy based on results designed by MDG-F Secretariat. The strategy is based on the principles of the Evaluation Group of the United Nations (UNEG) and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) on the quality and independence of the evaluations. Additionally, this evaluation will seek to continue the mid-term evaluation process and its recommendations. 21. The unit of analysis or object of study for this evaluation is the joint programme Governance of Water and Sanitation in Angola s poor Neighbourhoods (JP WatSan), understood to be the set of components, outcomes, outputs, activities and inputs that were detailed in the joint programme document and in associated modifications made during implementation. 22. This evaluation report has been prepared by the evaluator according to the requirements described in the Terms of Reference (ToR) of the final evaluation of the joint programme, according to the Norms and Standards of the UNEG, and following the format recommended by the Secretariat of the MDG-F Goals and methodology of evaluation Specific objectives of the evaluation: (1) to measure to what extent the JP has contributed to solve the needs and problems identified in the design phase; (2) to measure the programme s degree of implementation, efficiency and quality delivered on outputs and outcomes, against what was originally planned or subsequently officially revised; (3) to measure to what extent the JP has attained development results to the targeted population, beneficiaries, participants and the most marginalized whether individuals, communities, institutions, etc.; (4) to measure the joint programme contribution to the objectives set in its respective specific thematic window as well as the overall MDG fund objectives at local and national levels (MDGs, Paris Declaration and Accra Principles and UN reform); (5) to identify and document substantive 9

12 lessons learned and good practices on the specific topics of the thematic window, MDGs, Paris Declaration, Accra Principles and UN reform with the aim to support the sustainability of the joint programme or some of its components Methodology 24. The evaluation was carried out following a qualitative design. Qualitative research consists in placing people and their experiences at the centre of the process. This methodology allows getting an objective snapshot of the programme situation through the comparison of different experiences and points of view about the same events. Quantitative data included in the results framework were also be analysed. 25. Main characteristics of the evaluation methodology: (1) the evaluation was conducted under a gender perspective; (2) Human Rights approach with special attention to international conventions and regulatory frameworks; (3) participative approach. 26. Gender approach: it has been introduced through the review of the evaluation questions using the Harvard Analytical Framework, which has three main components: activity profile, access and control profile and analysis of influencing factors. The Harvard Analytical Framework was applied indirectly, through the inclusion of its components in the specific evaluation questions in the Evaluation Matrix (Annex 1). 27. Human Rights-based Approach: (1) the evaluation plan emphasized the participation of primary stakeholders (people and communities involved in the activities promoted by the programme) in the evaluation process. (2) The evaluation matrix includes two questions to study: (i) how Human Rights treaties and instruments informed the design process, and (ii) to what extent the design identified the relevant Human Rights claims and obligations. (3) The evaluation matrix also includes several questions aimed to analyse how the programme has influenced public policies, norms, standards and regulations related to access to water and sanitation. 28. Participation: the following participative work sessions with the Programme Management Committee (PMC) took place: (1) workshop dedicated to the contextualization of main findings after the first half of the evaluation mission; (2) final workshop dedicated to the contextualization of final conclusions and 10

13 recommendations. Objectives of these workshops: (1) to produce contextualized and realistic conclusions and recommendations; and (2) to promote ownership of the evaluation process Information collection tools: the main information collection tool was the individual interview. Individual interviews were defined to include all the evaluation questions proposed (Annex 2) in the ToR. The types of interviews applied, depending on the situation and the interviewee, were, in increasing order of structuring: (1) casual conversation, (2) guided interview and (3) standardized open-ended interview. Other information collection tools: desk review, Focus Group Discussions (FGD) with different groups of beneficiaries, participative work sessions with the PMC, and direct observation. The different tools were applied flexibly in order to achieve their adaptation to the working conditions Elaboration of the guides for the interviews and FDGs 30. The tool to put into practice the key questions described by the ToR, the particularities of a qualitative methodological approach and the mentioned evaluation main characteristics is the evaluation matrix (Annex 1). 31. As the evaluation matrix is a basic element in any evaluation, it s interesting to share some details of its construction: (1) the second column lists all the evaluation key questions described in the ToR classified by criterion. (2) Given that some of the key questions are too complex to be answered directly and some of them need to be completed to incorporate the gender and Human Rights approaches, a list of specific evaluation questions were prepared by the evaluator. (3) Next step was identifying the best information sources for each specific evaluation question. By doing so two objectives can be accomplished: (i) the evaluation gets open to broad participation through the inclusion of the widest possible range of participants in the evaluation process; and (ii) the answers to each question can be triangulated to obtain views as objective as possible about each issue. The last column assigns a code to every specific evaluation question to properly classify the information from each source of information, which allows processing data in a systematic way Information sources: primary stakeholders (people and communities involved in the activities promoted by the programme), UNCT agencies personnel involved in the design and/or implementation of the programme, staff of the national and local partners involved in the design and/or implementation of the programme, and AECID staff involved in the design and/or implementation of the programme. 11

14 Systematization of the information 33. Information from different sources was processed by the evaluator with the aim to compare, consolidate and analyse different opinions and data corresponding to every evaluation question in order to extract main findings and propose conclusions and recommendations, which were discussed with the PMC in the two already mentioned workshops. Findings, conclusions and recommendations are (1) based on data gathered, (2) gender sensitive, (3) formulated in the most objective way possible and avoiding personal opinions of the evaluator. The recommendations have a direct link to one or more conclusions, are realistic and easy to implement in future interventions with a reasonable investment of efforts Evaluator: Carlos Carravilla, founding member and member of the board of the Col lectiu d'estudis sobre Cooperació i Desenvolupament (El Col lectiu) 7, independent consultant specializing in tools and methodologies of International Cooperation Evaluation constraints: (1) the evaluator couldn t visit Luao (Moxico Province) because of poor coordination between IOM and UNICEF; (2) a higher involvement of UNICEF in the final evaluation process would have been beneficial (visits to programme locations in Viana and Luanda Province); (3) it was not possible to talk to the ILO s focal point for the programme via teleconference, although the UN agencies questionnaire (Annex 2) was sent to the ILO and completed; (4) it was not possible to get substantial information to report on the level of implementation of planned activities Description of the joint programme and the work context Context 36. Angola has made substantial progress in economic and political terms since the end of the war. However, the country continues to face massive developmental challenges which include reducing the dependency on oil and diversifying the economy, rebuilding its infrastructure, improving institutional capacity, governance, public financial management systems, human development indicators and the living conditions of the population

15 37. There have been moves to crack down on corruption and improve governance in the country since the president called for greater transparency in the management of public funds, and indicated a zero tolerance approach. As a result, the Law on Administrative Probity was approved on March 5, 2010 by the National Assembly, but implementation mechanisms and monitoring remain unclear Angola s Human Development Index (HDI) value for 2011 is 0.486, in the low human development category, positioning the country at 148 out of 187 countries and territories. Between 2000 and 2011, Angola s HDI value increased from to 0.486, an increase of 27.0 per cent or average annual increase of about 2.2 per cent 10. Finally, Angola is a middle-income country. 39. Due to a lack of relevant data, the Gender Inequality Index (GII) has not been calculated for this country. 40. Angola has the highest rate of diarrheal disease in the world with 114 years of life lost to diarrheal diseases for every 1,000 Angolans. Contaminated water, inadequate storm water drainage, and lack of even minimal sanitation facilities have resulted in high, and steadily increasing, rates of water and excretarelated diseases. Some of the worst sanitation in Angola can be found in its capital, Luanda, as well as in the hillside refugee camps surrounding the city where more than a million internally displaced persons still reside While the streamlining of institutional reforms has fostered momentum in water supply and sanitation sector development, constraints on further reforms and sustainability are due to the lack of financial, managerial, and technical capacity in the sector The Angolan government s objective is to increase the proportion of people having access to safedrinking water and adequate sanitation from 33% to 81% and from 48% to 74% respectively in the period Human Development Report USAID. Angola, Water and Sanitation Profile. 12 USAID. Angola, Water and Sanitation Profile. 13 JP WatSan programme document. 13

16 43. Governance figures among the main constraints to the expansion of water and sanitation services to reach more people, especially the poorest. The main issue is the un-sustainability of water standpoints that are managed by state-owned utility 14. Other identified constraints include: weakness of the regulatory and normative framework, lack of communities participation in decision-making processes related to water and sanitation, low investment in the capacity of WatSan institutions, and the absence of an accountability framework The joint programme (JP) 44. The JP WatSan in Angola (March 2009-March 2013), with a total approved budget of USD 7,600,000, aims to support national priorities on the water and sanitation sector bringing together different key actors, such as the MINEA, the MINAMB, local administrations, Civil Society Organizations, etc.; and building on comparative strengths and expertise from UNDP (USD 2,450,000), UNICEF (USD 3,750,000), IOM (USD 1,150,000), and ILO (USD 250,000). 45. The main implementing partners are the MINEA and MINAMB. These ministries are responsible for ensuring access to water and sanitation respectively to populations and therefore the main entities responsible for the realization of the objective of this programme. However due to the strong orientation of the programme towards water supply, MINEA is the key counterpart and direct beneficiary of most of the programme outputs/activities including water sector policy and regulation related issues, while MINAMB provides leadership to the (Community Led total Sanitation) component and benefits from the sanitation sector policy and regulation support 46. To achieve this, the programme seeks to: (1) establish a pro-poor policy and regulatory framework that feature community participation in the provision and management of WatSan facilities; (2) promote the autonomy of communities in the management of WatSan facilities 16 ; (3) reinforce the capacity of local governments to effectively monitor community WatSan management units, mobilize resources and fund community WatSan projects; (4) put in place an enhanced accountability system for peri-urban and rural water and sanitation sector. 14 JP WatSan programme document. 15 JP WatSan programme document. 16 The programme proposes a model of governance based on a network of autonomous units of small and medium scale WatSan utilities owned and managed by communities, namely the Grupos de Águas e Saneamento (GAS). 14

17 Table 1. Reshaped Results Framework according to the results of the baseline study (June 2010) Outcome: Community-oriented governance of peri-urban and rural water and sanitation sector promoted through autonomy-driven institutional, regulatory and accountability system (Governação e gestão orientada para a comunidade, do sector peri-urbano e rural de água e saneamento, promovido através de um sistema institucional, regulatório e de responsabilização orientado à autonomia). Joint Programme Outputs SMART Outputs Output 1. Legal and regulatory framework in favour of vulnerable and community management in place and functioning. Resultado 1: Quadro legal e regulatório com orientação a favor dos vulneráveis e da gestão comunitária, estabelecido e a funcionar. Output 2. Autonomy-oriented community water structures ensuring sustainable access to WatSan in all targeted areas. Resultado 2: Estruturas comunitárias autónomas de água assegurando o acesso sustentável a água e saneamento em todas as áreas alvo. Output 3. Mechanisms for monitoring and financing of community water systems and sanitation established at municipal level. Resultado 3: Mecanismos para a monitoria e financiamento dos sistemas comunitários de água e saneamento estabelecidos a nível municipal. Output 4. Established mechanisms for accountability of municipalities in service delivery of water supply and sanitation in peri-urban and rural. Resultado 4: Mecanismos estabelecidos para a responsabilização dos municípios na prestação dos serviços de abastecimento de água e saneamento nas áreas peri-urbanas e rurais. Output 5. Management and administration of the programme. Resultado 5: Gestão e administração do programa Output 1.1. Water and sanitation policies in place. Resultado 1.1. Políticas de água e saneamento operacionais. Output municipal master plans for water and sanitation, including models of community management, developed and adopted. Resultado planos diretores municipais de água e saneamento, incluindo modelos de gestão comunitária, elaborados e adoptados. Output 1.3. Water and sanitation regulatory framework in favour of the most vulnerable consolidated. Resultado 1.3. Quadro regulatório a favor dos vulneráveis consolidado para água e saneamento. Output 1.4. SISAS disseminates information and guides policy reforms and regulations. Resultado 1.4. SISAS a propagar informação e a guiar as reformas de políticas e regulamentos. Output 2.1. Users gain access to sustainable water and sanitation in target areas. Resultado 2.1: Usuários obtêm acesso sustentável a água e saneamento nas áreas alvo. Output 2.2. Community structures trained in the management of water and sanitation. Resultado 2.2.Estruturas comunitárias de água capacitadas na gestão de água e saneamento. Output 2.4. Local contractors trained for the supply of equipment and services to the community water system. Resultado 2.3. Empreiteiros locais capacitados para o fornecimento de equipamento e serviços aos sistemas comunitários de água. Output 2.4. Sustainable livelihoods Projects implemented in target areas. Resultado 2.4. Projetos de meios de vida sustentáveis implementados nas áreas alvo. Output 3.1. Information systems in place to monitor and supervise community structures. Resultado 3.1: Sistemas de informação estabelecidos para monitorar e supervisar as estruturas comunitárias. Output 3.2. Funds for Municipal Development of Water and Sanitation established. Resultado 3.2: Fundos Municipais de Fomento de Água e Saneamento estabelecidos. Municipal responsibility index. Índice de Responsabilização Municipal Output 4.1. Residents of the areas targeted have knowledge of their rights and information on water and sanitation and its management. Resultado 4.1. Residentes das áreas alvo têm conhecimentos dos seus direitos e informação sobre água e saneamento e a sua gestão. Output 4.2. Consumers alliances trained and capacitated to demand the improvement of services. Resultado 4.2. Alianças de consumidores formadas e capacitadas para reivindicarem o melhoramento de serviços. Output 4.3. National Forum on Water Institutionalized. Resultado 4.3. Fórum Nacional de Água institucionalizado. Output 4.4. Periodic participatory evaluation of the provision of WatSan services realized in the target localities. Resultado 4.4: Avaliação regular e participativa do abastecimento de água e saneamento. Planning and implementation. Planificação e implementação. Output 5.1. Coordination. Resultado 5.1: Coordenação. Output 5.2 Monitoring and evaluation. Resultado 5.2. Monitoria e avaliação. 15

18 47. Areas of intervention: Luanda and Moxico provinces in Angola: municipalities of Cacuaco, Viana and Kilamba Kiaxi (Province of Luanda) and the municipalities of Luena, Kamanongue and Luau (Province of Moxico). Figure 1. Location of the programme Source: 16

19 2. FINDINGS BY LEVEL OF ANALYSIS AND INFORMATION NEEDS 2.1. DESIGN LEVEL Relevance Programme design 48. The programme document was designed according to the Lei de Águas (2002) 17 ; nevertheless, no specific in-depth assessments, including gender needs assessments, were conducted before or during the design. Additionally, it seems that the programme was not designed with full and systematic participation of the national and sub-national partners and beneficiaries, although some consultations were done: (1) in 2008 UNICEF and IOM visited the Administração Municipal of Luena to introduce the programme; (2) a consultant (UNICEF) travelled to Luena to assess water and sanitation needs at the community level, though it was the Administração Municipal of Luena that decided which communities would be benefited by the programme. 49. When the programme was presented to the MINEA, the attitude of the ministry was no so collaborative since the Executivo Angolano (EA) was already implementing at that time the programme Água para Todos, a large water and sanitation infrastructure intervention at national level with a budget over USD 650,000,000. Although the EA could have benefited more from some complementarities, the limited budget of the JP WatSan compared to the budget of Água para Todos and to the needs of a country in transition and reconstruction after a long civil war very probably contributed to limited interest in the programme among ministerial decision makers. 50. The United Nations Human Rights Office (UNHRO) participated in the preparation of the concept note but closed operations in the country before the programme started. 17 It defines the policy framework for water resources management in general, and sets the foundation for the national policy for the use of water as consumption good. 17

20 Table 2. Budget (USD) modification after UNRCO closed operations in Angola Concept note Approved Modification budget budget PNUD 3, ,450,000-18% UNICEF 4,749,600 3,750,000-21% UNHRO 1,300, % OIM 1,388,406 1,150,000-17% ILO 1,551, ,000-84% Total 11,994,804 7,600,000-37% Source: Mid-term evaluation report. 51. It is necessary to comment on the role of ILO in the programme given the drastic reduction in its budget between the concept note (1,551,798 USD) and the programme finally approved (250,000 USD). ILO was actively involved in the design phase and, according to the memorandum of understanding between all participating UN agencies (October 2007), it was supposed to deliver, through a permanent ILO project team based in Luanda, and in collaboration with IOM, outputs related to (1) capacity building on income generating activities for targeted communities and (2) capacity building for local entrepreneurs operating in water and sanitation sectors. In March 2009, the final programme document (PRODOC) was sent to the ILO for signature with a budget of 250,000 USD to implement Output 2.3 (Resultado 2.3: Empreiteiros locais capacitados para o fornecimento de equipamento e serviços aos sistemas comunitários de água). ILO signed the PRODOC despite considering that the amount allocated was probably insufficient to meet the planned targets (OVIs 2.3.1, and were finally not achieved). Probably, the non-resident status of ILO limited its capacity to adequately negotiate its role in the joint programme. Programme redesign 52. In regards to the recommendations submitted by the Secretariat to the UNRC in Angola on 2 April 2008 together with the communication of official approval of the programme: The Ministério do Planeamento officially endorsed the JP WatSan when the Ministra do Planeamento signed the official programme document. 18